Monis Appu V. Heen Hamy Et Al.,

Present: Bertram C. J.

MONIS APPU v. HEEN HAMY et al.

577-P. C. Panadure, 82, 822.

Evidence-Co-accused-Statement from the dock by one implicating another-Evidence Ordinance, 8. 30.

A statement made by an accused person from the dock impliedly a co-accused is not admissible  in evidence against the latter.

APPEAL from a conviction by the Police Magistrate of Panadure. The two accused in this case were charged with the theft of cattle. Both absconded. The second accused was arrested first and produced by the police. On the charge being explained to him from the warrant, he stated: ?I saw Heen Hamy (i. e., the first accused) removing the bull about 12 o?clock. ?The first accused was not produced for another fortnight. He pleaded not guilty. Later the second accused repudiated the statement and said that it was made under police coercion. The learned Police Magistrate expressed his disbelief of the allegations against the

police, and relying on the statement of the second accused held; ?Now, taking this confession as a genuine one, and the rest of the evidence led in the case as corroborative of that confession, I think there is n

Click Here to Read the rest of this document